The Instigator
GoldFyre
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
Kylie.Cunningham
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

If a woman tricks a man into getting her pregnant, he should not be financially liable for the child

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
GoldFyre
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/10/2017 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 886 times Debate No: 100788
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (3)

 

GoldFyre

Pro

First round is acceptance only. I am specifically discussing cases in which the woman lied about using birth control and tricked her partner into getting her pregnant.
Kylie.Cunningham

Con

Ok if a man gets pressured into doing something that he doesn't want to do, then that just shows that he is weak. You should use protection even if she lies about taking birth control and if she is pressuring you, then it's not a healthy relationship and you should leave. It's like peer pressure, you can give in or you could be the bigger person and say no.
Debate Round No. 1
GoldFyre

Pro

His argument is a little odd because he just lists a bunch of reasons that the man shouldn't be involved in the situation. That doesn't prove that men should be financially liable. I agree that men should stay away from unhealthy relationships and that they should use protection even if the woman says that she is. That doesn't mean that he should be liable if she lies and does not. The foundation of any relationship is trust. If your partner loves you (and you assume that she does), and you believe that she respects you and is not trying to harm you in any way, a man not use additional protection because his partner has said that she is using it. Sex is more pleasurable without condoms, which might be another reason that the man is relying on his partner's birth control. Both men and women should have a say in when they are ready to become parents, not just women. If a woman tricks a man into pregnancy, she is committing fraud and he should not have to pay for her criminal actions. Just as we would not hold a victim liable if a company breached its contract with him, so should we not hold the victim (the man) liable in this case. Weak men deserve legal protections just as much as strong men do, so my opponent might be right that SOME of the men pressured into being parents are weak, but that does not mean they should get forced to be parents when they don't want to be.

Plus, holding him liable for child support incentivizes this kind of behavior because it makes the man liable and the woman not only gets off scott free, but she also gets money from the man. Why wouldn't she do it then? She gets a huge pay day
Kylie.Cunningham

Con

You are responsible for you actions , and when you have sex and she gets pregnant, you are responsible because it's your actions and you have to pay the consequences for your actions.
Debate Round No. 2
GoldFyre

Pro

He literally dropped all of my arguments and only responded with some new claim that you are responsible if she gets pregnant. But the problem is he dropped the part about the sex being done under fraudulent pretenses. You can't be responsible in a contract if the other person is lying/committing fraud. You aren't responsible because she said she was protected, so if a child results from the sex it's because of her lying, not a willful act on your part. You can't hold a victim responsible for the act of a con woman
Kylie.Cunningham

Con

If you know she is lying , then don't have sex, it's simple as that bud. Don't have sex unless you see her take the pill or you 100% completely trust her.
Debate Round No. 3
GoldFyre

Pro

Ok, her new response is that "if you know she's lying, don't have sex". This isn't resolutional. This debate is not about men who knowingly have sex with unprotected women; it's about men who are TRICKED because the partners are lying. Her argument is that you shouldn't have sex with women unless you watch them have the pill, so basically she's propagating misogyny by implying that all women are untrustworthy. Moreover, she's ignoring the fact that you can't hold the victim accountable for the actions of the perp. You don't say "don't do contracts with businesses unless you know 100% that they won't cheat you." Rather, you hold businesses who lie and don't deliver on their promises accountable. Similarly, these con women should be held accountable for their despicable behavior, not financially incentivized to steal from innocent men. She's not really responding to any of my claims in this debate.
Kylie.Cunningham

Con

Well they should know to keep a strong mental guard on these types of things because if he makes one mistake like have a baby then he will have to pay, I must agree but he should see if he should have sex and be a risk of the person lying and getting her pregnant, or he should watch her take the pill and then have sex.

Thanks for debating, I'm new at this and I'm sorry that I suck :)
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Yraelz// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Pro (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: I agree with Pro that Con's R3 response drops Pro's case. I extend that and weigh the round in his/her favor.

[*Reason for removal*] The voter is required to specifically assess arguments made by both debaters. Even if one side drops the other"s arguments wholesale, the voter is required to assess those points to explain why they outweighed arguments that were covered by the other side.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: FuzzyCatPotato// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Pro (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Con drops Pro args, concedes critical ground.

[*Reason for removal*] The voter is required to specifically assess arguments made by both debaters. This is too general.
************************************************************************
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
Not even close to what I said.
Posted by GoldFyre 1 year ago
GoldFyre
Ragnar, so if a woman can't pay for her child, should she be allowed to open the phone book and take away money from any random man in there to pay for the benefit of her child? I guess Bill Gates won't be wealthy for long
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
A basic problem with this, is that such laws are designed with the benefit of the child in mind, not the parents.
Posted by kgbisafterme 1 year ago
kgbisafterme
No prob.
Posted by Kylie.Cunningham 1 year ago
Kylie.Cunningham
Yeah can you please be my friend?
Posted by Kylie.Cunningham 1 year ago
Kylie.Cunningham
lol it's ok .
Posted by kgbisafterme 1 year ago
kgbisafterme
I literally just voted before I saw ur comment.
Posted by kgbisafterme 1 year ago
kgbisafterme
oops.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Yraelz 1 year ago
Yraelz
GoldFyreKylie.CunninghamTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: I agree with Pro that Con's R3 response drops Pro's case. Specifically, the argument that holding men liable incentivezes further trickery goes unaddressed. Con contends that men should realize the trickery but Pro is correct in asserting that this is extra-resolutional. I extend that and weigh the round in Pro's favor. Happy now?
Vote Placed by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
GoldFyreKylie.CunninghamTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Not much of a debate... Pro offered damages done, the man is the victim, lies, etc. Con simply stated that men should not believe women, and that women should take the pill in front of the man just before relations. So it's a couple soft arguments, against weak assertions, easy win for pro.
Vote Placed by kgbisafterme 1 year ago
kgbisafterme
GoldFyreKylie.CunninghamTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Kylie i'll give you credit that there was a real try but that's a position no one can defend. Goldie had the lead throughout the whole debate. He/she made the debate a giant trap because he specifically named what he was defending leaving the Con on the outside on the public's opinion. I'm sorry but I must vote in favor of GoldFyre.